Andrew Benton wrote: > On Tue, 01 May 2012 17:52:03 +0100 > Ken Moffat <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I'm now attempting to debug the problems with my new LFS system. >> One of the minor ones was that the postfix shutdown failed and I got >> a line of 5 red stars to draw it to my attention. Turns out to be >> because the script kills ${PIDFILE} ${BINFILE} and $BINFILE was >> pointing to the now non-existent /usr/lib/postfix/master. >> >> I could just raise a ticket or change the bootscript directly, but >> I'd prefer discussion on whether we should allow old installations >> to continue to work with the current bootscripts. For the moment >> I've got >> >> if [ -f /usr/lib/postfix/master ]; then >> BINFILE=/usr/lib/postfix/master >> else >> BINFILE=/usr/libexec/postfix/master >> fi >> >> which should allow for either version. But do we want to go for a >> degree of backward compatability, or only let it shut down cleanly >> with the current installation ? > > To me, we install the bootscript at the same time as we install the > package so the bootscript should be in sync with the current install > instructions and doesn't need to support whatever used to be on the > page.
I agree with this. > I must confess that I use my own custom bootscripts (based loosely on > the old LFS bootscripts). > >> If we do want compatability, is my >> test valid for lesser shells, or have I introduced a bash-ism ? I >> *think* it's good /bin/sh, but I never use other shells. > > I think it's a bashism (I may be wrong). I think the portable way to do > it is to use test: No, 'if [ some-logical-test ]; then stmt; fi' is valid bourne shell syntax. What is different is that the test can't be x == y, it must be a single = sign. For the standard [ should be /bin/[, but we have it as /usr/bin/[ > if test -f /usr/lib/postfix/master > then > BINFILE=/usr/lib/postfix/master > else > BINFILE=/usr/libexec/postfix/master > fi > > However, if the script has #!/bin/bash at the top it's a bash script so > use bashisms. True. But we use /bin/sh. We should try to maintain that. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
